Mapping narratives of urban resilience in the global south
Mapping narratives of urban resilience in the global south
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.01.001
复制
发表时间：
2019-01-01
影响因子：
8.9
通讯作者：
Hyams, Keith
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Borie, Maud;Pelling, Mark;Hyams, Keith
在全球环境变化的背景下，人们对复原力思维的能力寄予很大希望，以帮助解决与环境有关的风险。许多倡议旨在将复原力纳入城市规划实践。本文的目的是通过揭示不同的科学方法如何有助于产生关于城市韧性的不同叙事，动员不同的专家和证据形式，开启关于城市韧性的对话。一些学者告诫不要对复原力采取不加批判的方法，并询问复原力意味着什么以及对谁来说，还指出了这一概念的规范层面。在这一新兴学术的基础上，我们使用来自科学技术研究(STS)和关键社会科学的见解来研究参与制定复原力战略的行为者的知识基础设施和网络。通过在马尼拉、内罗毕和开普敦的实地考察，我们绘制了关于城市复原力的不同叙述，确定了科学如何在应该做什么的问题上为特定的观点提供正当或疏远的服务。我们讨论了科学方法对复原力规划的多重作用。虽然城市的复原力通常被描绘为双方同意的，但我们表明，在城市层面上存在一系列具有不同社会物质含义的叙事。通过这种方式，我们挖掘出存在于复原力政策明显共识之下的冲突，并勾勒出未来城市可持续发展的研究方向。
In the context of global environmental change much hope is placed in the ability of resilience thinking to help address environment-related risks. Numerous initiatives aim at incorporating resilience into urban planning practices. The purpose of this paper is to open up a conversation on urban resilience by unpacking how diverse science methods contribute to the production of different narratives of urban resilience mobilizing different experts and forms of evidence. A number of scholars have cautioned against uncritical approaches to resilience and asked what resilience means and for whom, also pointing out the normative dimension of the concept. Building on this emerging scholarship we use insights from science and technology studies (STS) and critical social sciences to look at the knowledge infrastructures and networks of actors involved in the development of resilience strategies. Drawing on fieldwork in Manila, Nairobi, and Cape Town, we map different narratives of urban resilience identifying the ways in which science serves to legitimate or alienate particular perspectives on what should be done. We discuss the multiple roles that science methods have for resilience planning. Whereas urban resilience is often portrayed as consensual, we show that a range of narratives, with diverse socio-material implications, exist at the city level. In this way we unearth the conflict that lies beneath an apparent consensus for resilience policy and outline future research directions for urban sustainability.